"One day tomorrow is the proper scrutiny of a 180-page bill?" she told the House.

"This is nonsense, this is absolutely absurd - absolutely absurd - to rush this through.

"We've already seen some mistakes in the original legislation because it was rammed through without any scrutiny."

ASIO seeking more access to information

Explanatory notes on the bill describe a new Memorandum of Understanding set to be granted between the State Government and ASIO, to allow more access to information on Queenslanders.

ASIO wants access to information held by the Queensland Department of Transport and Main Roads to assist in what it describes as "monitoring and protecting national security".

The explanatoy notes point out that "ASIO has identified that its limited ability to access this information is an intelligence gap, the significance of which has been highlighted in its preparations for the G20 Summit in Brisbane next year".

Information sought by ASIO is likely to include details about vehicle registrations, the holders of driver licences, and authorisations for people to undertake certain activities such as driving public passenger vehicles.

Call for committee to refuse to consider laws

The Queensland Council for Civil Liberties (QCCL) has called on the parliamentary committee to refuse to examine the state's new anti-bikie laws.

QCCL spokesman Terry O'Gorman, who has bikie clients, says the tight deadline shows the Government's disdain for the role of Parliament.

"We're callling on the relevant parliamentary committee to simply refuse to participate in this farce and charade of being required to report back on in excess of 20 amendments to acts of Parliament, including significant retrospective amendments to the Bail Act and very worrying criminal segregation orders in prisons," he said.

Mr O'Gorman also says there is no guarantee the state's new anti-bikie laws will be overturned in the High Court.

"Far too many people have far too much faith in the High Court," he said.

"The High Court can't just declare laws invalid because they don't like them - the High Court has to apply laws to the Constitution.

"The Australian Constitution, unlike the US constitution or the British Charter of Rights, does not contain a list of individual rights that can result in legislation being struck down."